arango_list_collections

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=true, which the description aligns with by implying a read operation ('List'). The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond this, such as not specifying if it returns system collections or pagination details. No contradiction exists, but with annotations covering safety, the description offers limited extra value.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, clear sentence with no wasted words. It front-loads the essential information ('List all collections'), making it highly efficient and easy to parse, which is ideal for a simple tool.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a zero-parameter read tool with annotations, the description is minimally adequate. However, it lacks output details (no schema provided) and doesn't address potential complexities like collection types or ordering. It meets basic needs but could be more informative given the tool's role among siblings.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema has 0 parameters with 100% coverage, so no parameter documentation is needed. The description appropriately omits parameter details, focusing on the tool's purpose without redundancy. A baseline of 4 is applied since no parameters exist to explain.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the action ('List') and resource ('all collections in the database'), making the tool's purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from siblings like 'arango_query' which might also list collections, though the verb 'List' suggests a straightforward retrieval operation.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites, compare to siblings like 'arango_query' for more complex queries, or specify contexts where listing collections is appropriate, leaving usage decisions ambiguous.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.